FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT June 28, 2007 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 15352 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ B I A N o. A 96- 169- 819 E D D Y E D D Y T O , P e titio n e r , v ersu s U .S . A T T O RN E Y G E N E R A L , R e s p o n d e n t.

________________________ P e t i t i on f orR e vi e w of

aD e c i s i on of

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls

_________________________ ( Ju n e 28, 2007) B efo re W IL S O N , P R Y O R an d F A Y , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

E ddy E ddy t o pe t i t i ons f orr e vi e w of

the or de rof

the B oa r d of

I m m i gr a t i on A p p e a ls ( “B I A ” ) a f

f irm in g th e I m m ig r a tio n J u d g e ’s ( “I J ” ) d e n ia l o f h is m o tio n to r e ope n hi s r e m ova l pr oc e e di ngs f ol l ow i ng a n i n abs e nt i ar e m ova l or de r . F orthe r e a s o n s s e t f

o r th m o r e f

u lly b e lo w , w e d e n y th e p e titio n . E dd yt o, appeari ng pro se bef ore the IJ , adm i tt ed the al l egat i on s i n h i s not i ce t o app ea r and re qu es t ed a hear i ng on hi s a sy l um appl i ca t i on . T he IJprov i ded o ra l a n d w r itte n n o tic e o f

th e h e a r in g a n d th e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f f a ilin g to ap p e a r . H o w e v e r , E d d y to d id n o t ap p e a ra t th e h e a r in g , a n d w a s o r d e r e d r e m o v e d in abse nt i a. E dd yt o fi l ed a pro se no t i ce of appeal t o the B IA . W hi l e the appeal w as p e n d in g , E d d y to r e ta in e d c o u n s e l a n d s o u g h t to r e o p e n h is r e m o v a l p r o c e e d in g s . E d d yt o co n t en d ed th ath e h ad ret ai n ed p ri o r rep resen t at i o n th ro u g h th e C h i n ese Indo nesi an A m er i ca n S oci ety ( “ C IA S ”) , an organi za t i on w ho se pri nci pal s w er e s u b s e q u e n tly in d ic te d f

o rim m ig r a tio n f

r au d . H e c la im e d th a t C I A S a d v is e d h im nott o appe a rf

orhi s i ndi vi dua l he a r i ng a nd, ba s e d on thi s “ i nc orr e c t ” a nd “i n ap p ro p riate” leg al ad v ice, h e d idn o t att en d th e h ea rin g . T h e I J d en ied E d d yto ’s m o ti o n to re o p en an d th e B IA d ism isse d th e a p p ea l, co n clu d in g th at E d d yto ’s deci si on t o “ fol l ow the advi ce of the i m m i grat i on consul t anti nst ea d o f the advi ce fr om the Im m i grat i on Judg e, w i th ful l kn ow l edge of the consequences of that d e c is io n , d o e s n o t a m o u n t to e x c e p tio n a l c ir c u m s ta n c e s to e x c u s e h is ab s e n c e .” E ddy t o now a r gue s tha the w a s e nt i t l e d t o ha ve hi s pr oc e e di ngs r e ope ne d ba s e d onEddy to also raises two additional pertinent arguments. First, he a rgues that re opening 1 wa s w arrante d d

ueto l a c k o f noti c ebe c a

us e , even th ough h ere c e ive d n oti c eof thehe aring , this notice wa s vitiated by

the advicethat he re ceive d not to go to cour t. He fur ther a rgues that the BIA’s and IJ ’s interpretation of 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)( 5)(C), in a ma nner that results in a deprivation of his day

in court through no fault of his own, would c onstitut e a violation of due proc e ss. Our re view o f t

here c ord re ve als t

hat ne ith er o f t

he seargumentswa s raise d p ri or to Eddy to’s petition for review. “We lack jurisdiction to consider a c laim raised in a petition for review unless the petitioner ha s exhausted his administrative remedies with respec t thereto.” Amaya-Artunduag a v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 463 F .3d 1247, 1250-51 (11th Cir. 2006) (requiring exhaustion of a due proc ess claim). 3 e x c e p tio n a l c ir c u m s ta n c e s b e c au s e h e w a s ju s tif ie d in r e ly in g o n a d v ic e f r o m h is l e ga l r e pr e s e nt a t i ve tha the nota tt e nd the he a r i ng on hi s a s y l um appl i c a t i on a nd f a i l e d t o appe a ra tthi s he ar i ng thr ough no f aul tof hi s ow n. 1 I n th is c a s e , w e r e v ie w th e B I A ’s d e c is io n o n ly , a s th e B I A d id n o t e x p r e s s ly adop tthe IJ ’ s opi ni on . S ee A l N ajj arv. A shcr oft , 25 7 F . 3d 12 62 , 12 84 (11th C i r. 2 0 0 1 ) . W e r e v ie w th e d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n f

o ra n ab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . A ni n v . R eno, 18 8 F . 3d 12 73 , 12 76 (11th C i r. 19 99 ). “ A n abu se of di sc re t i on m ay be foun d i n tho se ci rc um st ance s w here the [B IA ’ s] deci si on prov i des no rat i on al e xpl a na t i on, i ne xpl i c abl y de pa r t s f r om e s t abl i s he d pol i c i e s , i s de voi d of a ny reaso n i n g , o r co n t ai n s o n l y su m m ary o r co n cl u so ry st at em en t s; th ati s t o say, w h e r e th e [ BI A ] h a s a c t e d i n a n a rb i tr a ry o rc ap r i c i o u s ma n n e r . ” Zh a o v . U . S. D ep’ tof Just i ce , 26 5 F . 3d 83 , 93 (2d C i r. 20 01 ) ( ci t at i on s om i tt ed). A n o r d e ro f

r e m o v a l, e n te r e d in ab s e n tia , m a y b e r e s c in d e d o n ly ( I ) upon am ot i on t o r e ope n f i l e d w i thi n 180 da y s a f

t e rthe da t e of

the order of re m ov al i f the al i en dem on stra t es thatthe fa i l ure t o app ea r w as4 be c aus e of

e xc e pt i ona l c i r c um s t a nc e s ( a s de f i ne d i n s ubs e c t i on ( e ) ( 1) of thi s s e c t i on) , or (i i ) upo n a m ot i on t o reopen fi l ed atany t i m e i f the al i en dem on stra t es thatthe al i en di d n otre ce i ve no t i ce i n acc ordance w i th pa r a gr aph ( 1) or( 2) of s e c t i on 1229( a ) of

thi s t i t l e orthe a l i e n de m ons tr a t e s tha tthe a l i e n w a s i n F e de r a l orS t a t e c us t ody a nd the f a i l ur e t o appe a rw a s thr ough no f aul tof the a l i e n. 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 2 9 a ( b ) ( 5 ) ( C) , I N A § 2 4 0 ( b ) ( 5 ) ( C) ; s e e a l s o 8 C. F. R. § 1 00 3. 23 (b)( 4)(i i ) ( sa m e) . E xcept i on al ci rc um st ance s are “ exce pt i on al c i r c um s t anc e s ( s uc h a s ba tt e ry ore xtr e m e c rue l ty t o the a l i e n ora ny c hi l d or pa r e ntof the a l i e n, s e r i ous i l l ne s s of the a l i e n, ors e r i ous i l l ne s s orde a th of the s pous e , c hi l d, orpa r e ntof the a l i e n, butnoti nc l udi ng l e s s c om pe l l i ng c i r c u m s t an c e s ) b e y o n d th e c o n tr o l o f th e a l i e n . ” 8 U. S . C . § 1 2 2 9 a ( e ) ( 1 ) , I NA § 2 4 0 ( e ) ( 1 ) . T he B I A ha s r e c ogni z e d tha ti ne f f e c t i ve a s s i s t a nc e of

c ouns e l c a n be a n e xc e pt i ona l c i r c um s t a nc e w a rr a nt i ng r e ope ni ng of a n i n abs e nt i aor de rof re m ov al . S ee In re R i vera -C l ar os, 21 I. & N . D ec . 59 9, 60 2 (B IA 19 96 ) ( en banc); In re G ri

j al va-B arre ra , 21 I. & N . D ec . 47 2, 47 3-74 (B IA 19 96 ). In G ri j al va, the B IA foun d thatthe al i en es t abl i shed except i on al ci rc um st ance s w he r e a n e m pl oy e e of

hi s f orm e ra tt orne y c a l l e d hi m on the m orni ng of the s c he dul e d he a r i ng a nd i nf orm e d hi m tha tthe r e ha d be e n ac ont i nua nc e a nd th a t h e s h o u ld n o t ap p e a r . G r ija lv a , 2 1 I . & N . D e c a t 4 7 3 - 7 4 .5 In G rijalv a, th e a li en w as en ti tl ed to re ly o n h is atto rn ey ’s re pres ent at i on thathe di d n otneed t o app ea r bec ause the heari ng had b ee n cont i nu ed. T hi s c as e i s di st i ng ui shabl e, ho w ever , because her e the IJadvi se d E d d y to o f

th e n e e d to ap p e a ra t h is h e a r in g a n d th e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f f a ilin g to do s o, a nd E ddy t o a l s o r e c e i ve d w r i tt e n not i c e . E ddy t o pr ovi de d no e xpl a na t i on a s t o w hy he w a s t ol d nott o appe a rf orhi s he a r i ng, j us ttha the s h o u l d n o ta tt e n d . B e i n g a d v i s e d n o tt o a tt e n d b y s o m e o n e a tC I AS contra di ct ed the w arni ng s gi ven b y the IJ . N everthel es s, E dd yt o fol l ow ed C I A S ’ s a dvi c e and di d notappe a r . U nde rthe s e f a c t s , w e c a nnots a y tha tthe B I A ’s c o n c lu s io n th a t E d d y to f a ile d to e s tab lis h e x c e p tio n a l c ir c u m s ta n c e s to e xc us e hi s abs e nc e w a s a n abus e of di s c r e t i on. In l i g h to f th e fo reg o i n g , E d d yt o ’ s p et i t i o n fo r rev i ew i s DE NI E D.